LGBTreport FINAL - Compressed

A Global Outlook on LGBTI
Social Exclusion through 2030

Image by Sergey Neamoscou
1
Contents
Acknowledgements 3
Key findings 4
Executive summary 5
Purpose and methodology 6
Key terms 7
Social exclusion 8
Estimates of the global LGBTI population 10

Heavy trends in LGBTI social exclusion 11

Critcal uncertainties in LGBTI social exclusion 14

Scenarios 20
Slow going 21
Progress and persecution 22
Hollow victories 23
Institutions as leaders 24

Conclusion 25
Annex: Scenario analysis methods 26
References 32
2
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the following experts for their The majority of the photos used in this report have been taken by
contributions to the development of this report. Sergey Neamoscou. We have been given permission from Sergey
to include these, and most importantly have been given informed
• Sam Avrett, The Fremont Center consent from the individuals themselves, to include their portraits
within this report and its affiliated campaign materials. All of these
• Kent Klindera, MPH, United States Agency for International individuals are aged 18 and above. The other photos used in this
Development / Office of HIV/AIDS (USAID/OHA) report come from the free to use website, www.unspash.com .
• Bruno Spire, INSERM and AIDES The Inter-Agency Regional Analysts Network (IARAN)
is a global consortium of operational aid agencies and academic
• Mutawakilu Mohammed, Center for Popular Education and institutions, with a team of analysts working around the world.
Human Rights, Ghana (CEPEHRG) The IARAN has over five years experience in providing strategic
foresight analysis to the humanitarian sector.
• Pallav Patankar, ALMATA
The IARAN supports humanitarian actors in managing future
• George Ayala, PsyD, MSMGF (the Global Forum on MSM uncertainty through the use of techniques like scenario analysis
& HIV) and strategic planning so non governmental organisations
(NGOs) can be better positioned for the future by examining the
• Karim Ladak, LBGT+ Activist, Toronto different ways it could unfold over the next one to fifteen years.
This allows NGOs to be more responsive, resource efficient, and
• Dr Cai Wilkinson, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, impactful. By looking to the future, we can pre-empt change
Deakin University and save lives.
• Laura Carter, Amnesty International UK
• Yves Yomb, Africagay contre le sida
• Dr Anne Senequier, IRIS
• Doug Kerr, Dignity Network
• Maurice Tomlinson, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network
• Carlos Idibouo, House of Culture for Human Diversity,

Dignity Network
• Dr Michel Bourrelly, IHU Méditerranée Infection
• Sergey Neamoscou, photographer

3
Key Findings
• There are likely hundreds of millions of LGBTI people in • Additional leverage points that will be more difficult for
the world, nearly all of whom experience some degree of actors to affect are: stigmatization, religious acceptance,
social exclusion. and political scapegoating of LGBTI individuals.
• The extent of the problem could be classified as a protracted • These factors are at the center of the system of interactions
humanitarian crisis. that contribute to the social exclusion of LGBTI individuals.
Influencing them will affect many other down-stream
• The humanitarian sector is not doing enough to mainstream factors that have a more immediate impact on people’s
LGBTI-inclusive dimensions into their work. lives like: workplace discrimination, rejection by family,
denial of marriage rights, etc.
• The heavy trends that will continue to shape LGBTI social
exclusion through 2030 are: how we conceive sexuality, • Institutions such as governments, religious organizations,
the legacy of colonialism, and the level of interaction the and the media are some of the most critical in shaping the
general public has with LGBTI individuals. conditions for social inclusion.
• Key leverage points for programs are the criminalization • There will be huge variation between countries, but overall
of same-sex relations and media representations of LGBTI progress to building better social inclusion will be slow. This
individuals. has serious implications for the health, safety and dignity
of LGBTI communities the world over as they suffer the
impacts of social exclusion.
• The use of foresight approaches, like scenario analysis, can

assist actors working on LGBTI issues to manage future
uncertainty and plan more strategically.

4
Executive Summary
Social exclusion affects a range of development indicators for It is too easy for this crisis to be overlooked as LGBTI individuals
this population. Social exclusion exists when individuals are are spread around the world, representing a small proportion
prevented from participating in social, economic, and/or political of the population in any given area. Humanitarian attention is
life. As a result, they may not have access to basic physical focused on crises where the distribution of human suffering
needs like sustainable livelihoods, income, housing, education, forms a geographical cluster. As a result, the humanitarian
and healthcare. However, they may also be denied intangibles sector has not focused on LGBTI whole groups, instead only
like human rights, legal protections, and basic dignities. addressing specific instances of persecution, or indirectly
This can have psychological implications like feelings of through other interventions like HIV programming. However,
inferiority and alienation1. the ‘leave no one behind agenda3’ for the Sustainable
Development Goals provides a framework and an opportunity
LGBTI individuals are more likely to experience poverty, lack for humanitarian actors to action commitments to inclusivity,
healthcare, attempt suicide, and be subjected to physical moving beyond rhetoric to close the gap between commitments
or sexual violence, even in societies that are considered and implementation that can foster real change for the lived
more accepting of LGBTI individuals. There are hundreds reality of LGBTI individuals around the world. Progress on LGBTI
of millions of LGBTI individuals around the world, most of social exclusion by 2030 is essential to meeting the Sustainable
whom are at a greater risk of “death, disease, or disruption Development Goals and tackling the causes of this protracted
of their livelihoods2” than the rest of the population. As such, crisis that affects hundreds of millions of individuals worldwide.
this situation should be characterized as a protracted crisis
and receive greater attention from the humanitarian sector.

5
Purpose and methodology
The purpose of this report is to support planning on The methods of this report are based on a five-step analytical
international LGBTI issues. It is intended to be used to raise toolkit developed by the IARAN:
the profile of this ongoing crisis and highlight the significant
implications for these groups, which stem from their ongoing 1. Architecture – identification of factors that drive LGBTI
exclusion in many societies across the globe. Additionally, its social exclusion.
findings serve to support policy formation, country strategies,
and advocacy underpinning the “leave no one behind” 2. Impact-Uncertainty Matrix – ranking of factors by their
agenda, working to ensure that the Sustainable Development impact and uncertainty to identify heavy trends and critical
Goals realize their potential as a vehicle to advance equality. uncertainties.
Scenario analysis is a means of managing uncertainty by 3. MICMAC – a cross impact matrix of the critical uncertainties
examining past trends and emerging issues to explore probable to identify which are central to the system of interactions. These
futures. The technique is used to break complex issues down are then used to form the logic of scenarios.
into their components and identify which are the key drivers of
change. Scenarios are based on the different combinations of 4. Hypothesis – morphological analysis of logical combinations
how these drivers may unfold in the future. Each scenario is then of the possible future outcomes for each scenario logic.
a description of a possible future. Scenarios are intended as tools
that allow decision makers to plan for a range of contingencies and 5. Scenarios – a narrative description of the future based on
strategically pursue policies that can lead to a preferred future. the combination of scenario logic hypotheses.
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Drivers Step 4 Step 5
Construction of sexual
classifications
Legacy of colonialism
Heavy trends Scenario assumptions
Level of interaction and

familiarity
Stigmatization
Negative representation in Scenarios

the media
High influence on system Criminalization Scenario hypotheses
Religious acceptance
Factors driving social Political scapegoating

exclusion of LGBTI
individuals Association with illegal or
immoral behaviour
Critical uncertainties Workplace discrimination
and unemployment
Marriage and parental

rights
Low influence (but not low Perception of cause/

importance) on system responsibility
Rejection by family/
community
Poverty
Discrimination by or
against healthcare
workers
Figure 1. Representation of how the factors of the study are classified and used through the steps of the analysis.
6
Key terms
Biological sex Transgender
• Based on one’s biological characteristics including: •• When one’s gender identity does not match their assigned
chromosomes, genes, hormones, internal and external biological sex. This is a broad term that can reflect a
sex organs, and secondary sex characteristics. Infants are spectrum of experiences. Many transgender individuals
assigned a sex at birth based on their perceived traits. take steps to express their gender identity by changing
Biological sex is neither immutable nor exclusively male or their style of dress and mannerisms, taking hormone
female. Intersex individuals do not fit into either category, therapy, and/or undergoing gender-affirmation surgery.
while transgender individuals may change some aspects However, the extent to which they do, if at all, is a personal
of their biological sex such as hormones, genitalia, and decision unique to the individual.
secondary sex characteristics.
Gender identity Cisgender
•• How one perceives themselves within the socially •• When one’s gender identity matches their assigned
constructed roles and behaviors ascribed to men and biological sex. This is independent of gender expression.
women. This is a personal self-conception that may differ
from one’s sex and/or how they express themselves publicly.
Gender expression Sexual orientation
• How one socially expresses themselves within the socially • One who is sexually, romantically, and/or emotionally attracted
constructed roles and behaviors ascribed to men and to based on their sex/gender in relation to one’s own.
women. This can be done through behavior, fashion, speech
characteristics, etc.
Figure 2. A two continua representation of biological sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression, as an alternative to the dichotomous or single spectrum approaches. 4
7
Social exclusion
Social exclusion can be defined as the “the lack or denial of The discussion of how social exclusion affects LGBTI individuals
resources, rights, goods and services, and the inability to is challenging because it tackles widely held perceptions around
participate in the normal relationships and activities, available to gender, gender expression, sexual attraction and behavior, and
the majority of people in a society, whether in economic, social, biological issues. Too often, policy makers and the general public
cultural or political arenas.”� Such a state impacts many areas of are restricted in their traditional thinking, while solutions to these
an individual’s life. They may face unequal access to resources, issues often require thinking outside these social constructions.
such as employment, housing, education, and healthcare. They By listening to the lived realities of LGBTI individuals, we can
may be denied public participation, preventing them from advance our understanding of the concepts and the challenges
exercising their agency and rights, and being allowed to engage they face.
in human interactions and relationships. Their quality of life may
also suffer, from poor physical and mental health to increased
targets of crime and violence.
Social exclusion is a multi-dimensional process6 that impacts

the humanitarian conditions for LGBTI individuals around the
world. Using the United States as an example, where data is more
available, there are many disparities between LGBTI and straight,
cisgender individuals. In the United States, sodomy laws were ruled
unconstitutional in 2003. Legal protections were expanding in recent
years such as nationwide recognition of same-sex marriage in 2013
and adoption rights in 2016, while housing, employment, gender
recognition, and hate-crime protections are in place in some parts
of the country. In this context, the LGBTI community still shows
far worse indicators than the general public. For example, suicide
rates are 10-20% for gay, lesbian, and bisexual adults and 41% for
transgender adults, while 4.6% for the general adult population7.
LGBTI individuals are more likely to be unemployed (8% LGBTI vs
12% non-LGBTI) and living in poverty (32% LGBTI vs 24% non-
LGBTI).8 They are also less likely to have health insurance (79%
LGBTI vs 86% non-LGBTI).9
8
The more LGBTI individuals are socially accepted, the more their Social exclusion also incorporates participation in the economic
wellbeing improves. For example, greater family acceptance and political spheres. When LGBTI individuals are pushed to the
reduced suicide attempts by 54%, substance abuse by 58%, and margins of society and denied access to the same opportunities
depression by 51.6%. Such acceptance also increased individuals as the rest of the population, they suffer. Development indicators
wider acceptance in society by 26%, and their general health by show worse measures for these groups because they face
18%.10 These discrepancies show that institutional policies are barriers to providing for their own wellbeing. Their condition
important, but are not enough on their own to prevent social often goes overlooked by humanitarian actors because they are,
exclusion because it is the result of many forms of human often intentionally, less visible and represent a small portion of
interaction. the population in any given area. Yet together they represent a
large body of people who face a silent crisis.
LGBTI individuals also face threats to their physical safety.
Violence motivated by homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia
occurs around the world. In the US, LGBTI individuals are
targeted proportionally more than other minority groups who
are often persecuted, such as Jews, Muslims, and African-
Americans.11 There were over 1,000 reported instances in 2016
alone. The LGBTI umbrella covers a wide range of distinct groups
each of which also intersects with other demographic factors
like sex, ethnicity, age, religion, etc. For instance, gay men are
often targeted more than lesbians, and people of color12 more
than whites. Transgender women experience exceptionally high
levels of murder and sexual violence, particularly when they are
women of color. Social exclusion creates the permissive climate
where such violence can be carried out. In many countries such
crimes are committed with impunity, as the government refuses
to investigate them. In others, government and religious leaders
encourage such violence.

9
Estimates of the global LGBTI
population
Currently, there is no reliable estimate of the global number of is particularly little reliable data on transgender and intersex
LGBTI individuals. Estimates are limited to only a few, mostly populations.16
Western, countries. Surveys of LGBTI individuals struggle with
respondent bias. As there is still a stigma attached to being There is very little data from the non-Western world and
LGBTI, even in more accepting societies, many people still generalizing to other regions is problematic. Statistically, rates of
do not want to speak openly. Methodological techniques can LGBTI individuals should be equal for all populations, however,
help reduce underreporting, particularly by making surveys as social prohibition can restrict the expression of this. For instance,
anonymous as possible, and/or by being electronic instead of in even within the US, demographics have a great influence on the
person. Another important consideration is that LGBTI related response rate, such as 12% of non-religious youths identifying as
surveys can measure separate issues: LGB and only 1% of white evangelical youths,17 or 5.8% of white
men reporting having sex with other men but only 2.9% of Asian
• Identity: Does the individual consider themselves to be men.18 As such, it is with a note of caution that we apply Western
gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender? data to the global population. Instead of attempting to place a
specific figure, we offer a wide range from overly generous to
• Attraction: Does the individual feel sexual or romantic highly conservative. Nevertheless, these figures can still narrow
attraction to members of the same and/or opposite sex? down the likely size of the LGBTI population globally and provide
better insight in the scope of the humanitarian issues they face.
• Behavior: Does the individual have sexual or romantic
relations with members of the same and/or opposite sex? High estimate: 14% This figure is based on statistics from
the US on the percentage of individuals who have engaged
Each measure has their use for analysis of specific issues and in any same-sex behavior in their lifetime (8.2%)19 and then
their comparison can be quite insightful too. However, most additionally increased for potential underreporting (+59%).20
LGBTI work is focused on sexual behavior. This measure most The rate is likely an overestimate as it accounts for any past
accurately reflects the lived experiences of LGBTI individuals experiences, which includes isolated experimentation, rather
separate from the issues of labels. It also has the greatest than regular behavior. Additionally, it assumes a large percent
relevance to issues like public health and legal prohibitions. of respondents are not answering questions truthfully.
LGBTI rights movements have cited statistics that 10% of Low estimate: 0.25% This figure is based on UNAIDS survey
the overall population is LGBTI. However, this is not a precise data21 of men who have sex with men (MSM) in non-Western or
assessment. It is believed that this figure was loosely based on Latin American countries. WHO’s international estimates of this
the research of Alfred Kinsey in the 1940s, which was pioneering, figure are closer to 2-4%22 (or even potentially 3-16%).23 The
although of questionable accuracy. 10% of the population was 0.25% figure is likely an underestimate as it is based on one of
too large to ignore but too small to pose a threat.13 Knowing the the most conservative LGBTI estimates available for the wider
size of the population is very important when trying to deal with world. Specifically, it may reflect self-reporting bias in countries
policy issues. As a result, government and academic researchers where LGBTI individuals are stigmatized and many of these
have been attempting to capture a more accurate estimate of surveys ask about recent sexual behavior (1 or 5 years) which
this population using more modern and sophisticated survey may further restrict the reported rate.
techniques.
Based on these figures, the global LGBTI population is
A meta-analysis found that self-identifying LGB individuals estimated to be between 19 million and 1 billion people. The
represent about 3.5% of the population. The survey results exact number is unlikely to be at either extreme, and so can
ranged from 1.2% to 5.6%. Men were more likely to identify as be reasonably assumed to be in the hundreds of millions.
gay than bisexual, while women were more likely to identify as
bisexual than lesbian. Figures for same sex attraction (1.8% to
11%) and experience (6.9% to 8.8%) were greater than those who
self-identified, suggesting that even in more accepting nations,
many individuals may not feel comfortable identifying as gay,
lesbian or bisexual. Lastly, the study found that transgender
populations were estimated to be much smaller at 0.3%, but
included only those who had undergone some degree of
transitioning.14 Some researchers argue that these figures still
greatly underreport the actual population size due to the stigma
that continues to surround these issues15. Additionally, there
10
The drivers that will shape LGBTI social exclusion for entering a marriage with an individual of the opposite sex and
hundreds of millions of people over the course of the outlook having children. Same-sex relations are something separate that
are varied however, the most influential of these drivers are they may also engage in but are not defined by. Such conflict
the following: around labels is why public health workers use terms like “men
who have sex with men” (MSM) to try and identify segments
•• Construction of sexual classifications, of the population based on behavior. Though these descriptive
labels also turn into identities where some individuals who have
•• Legacy of colonialism, same-sex relations do not want to be defined as such. The use
of local terminology to describe sexual behavioral patterns is
•• Level of interaction and familiarity, often far more effective. If homosexuality and heterosexuality
are modern Western constructs, then they are neither universal
•• Stigmatization, nor permanent. However, they are so deeply engrained that they
will continue to shape how sexuality is conceived well through
•• Negative representation in the media, 2030. Though over a longer period, it is likely to change, as many
academics and advocates are already challenging the way the
•• Criminalization, world thinks about sexuality.
•• Religious acceptance One of the major challenges to the conception of sexuality

as a dichotomy is bisexuality. Yet, while bisexuality is officially
•• Political scapegoating. included in the “LGBTI” label, it is a broad catch-all category
between these poles that does not recognize the range of
These have been categorized into heavy trends, which will experiences or fluidity over time. Bisexuals in fact make up the
continue to shape the evolution of LGBTI social exclusion in a largest group in the LGBTI community and yet they are the least
predicable way and critical uncertainties. For a discussion on visible and often feel excluded by it.24 So even within LGBTI
how these drivers were selected, please the method section in communities there is bias towards falling back on this Western
the Annex on page 26. sexual dichotomy.
Heavy trends in LGBTI social Gender has also come to be defined as a binary. One’s
gender identity and expression are widely assumed to be
exclusion fixed to one’s sex. If there are only two accepted sexes, then
there are only two accepted genders. Men are masculine and
For the heavy trends, it is expected that they will continue to women are feminine. Transgender individuals face very severe
progress along their current trajectory. As a result, assumptions discrimination around the world for defying the society’s
can be made more confidently about the evolution of these conceptions of gender. However, there are still a number of
factors and the role that they play in the broader system. Each non-Western cultures that construct gender in three or more
of these is explored in more detail in this section. categories. In such contexts, transgender people often still do
not receive the same treatment as men or women but they
Construction of sexual classifications have a socially accepted space in which to live and define
themselves. There is also a growing trend among the youth in
A broad factor shaping the context of LGBTI issues is how we more Western nations to define themselves as nonbinary, or
perceive and define sexuality, in addition to sex and gender. existing outside the gender dichotomy.25 They may choose to
Western society has divided these characteristics into two be neither masculine nor feminine (gender neutral), masculine
alternatives: heterosexual and homosexual, male and female, and feminine (androgynous), changing levels of masculine and
masculine and feminine. Sexuality is how humans categorize feminine over time (gender fluid), or any number of other self-
and define patterns of sexual acts. The words “heterosexual” described categories. A handful of countries are also providing
and “homosexual” were not coined until 1868 and were not transgender and/or non-binary individuals the ability to legally
normalized until the 1930s. Western society had reached a define themselves in ways other than as a man or woman. These
turning point where it began to classify sexual identities rather states represent those that historically define gender outside
than sexual behaviors. This new construction of sexuality has the Western conception of it, mostly in the Asia-Pacific region,
spread around the world where it often conflicts with local or that are more progressive Western nations that are moving
conceptions of sexuality. “Gay” or “lesbian” is seen as a specific beyond their traditional constructions of gender.
Western identity that does not describe the lived experience of
many non-Western individuals who engage in same-sex behavior.
Such individuals may choose to follow social norms, such as
11
Biological sex is even more widely assumed to be a dichotomy The British, alternatively, maintained anti-sodomy laws until 1967,
than sexuality or gender. Yet it is also not nearly as divisible as long after the independence of most of their colonies in the 1950s
is commonly believed. An individual’s sex is typically assigned and 1960s.29 As a result, British colonialism, in particular, was
at birth by a medical practitioner based on the newborn’s found to have contributed to the criminalization of homosexual
genitalia, or before birth based on prenatal chromosomal conduct through the imposition of their legal codes.30 More than
testing. However, the factors that determine sex are more half of the over 80 countries that still criminalize these acts are
complicated.26 Biological sex too is a spectrum between what former British colonies.31 The decriminalization of homosexual
is commonly ascribed as male and female, with around 0.08% conduct is slower in states that have previously been colonized
to 1.7% of the populations estimated to be intersex, depending (by any power) than those that were not.32 This is not to place
on how the concept is defined.27 This is because the factors the burden of responsibility for today’s anti-LGBTI policies on
that define our conception of sex do not follow only two paths, former colonial powers while excusing the governments that
instead there is a complex web in which chromosomes, genes, perpetuate such discrimination, rather it is to set the context
hormones, internal and external sex organs, and secondary sex for understanding contemporary LGBTI issues.
characteristics are expressed and interconnected.28 Intersex
individuals, do not clearly fall within this sex binary, having In one of the ironies of history, LGBTI rights are now sometimes
not clearly defined external sex organs or ones that do not accused of being cultural colonialism from the West.33 Even
match their chromosomes. Intersex individuals often face social though Christian European values shaped much of the rest of
exclusion or discrimination because they exist outside the social the world’s views and values on sexuality, they have become
narrative on sex. Many also receive surgery at an early age to engrained in many post-colonial societies. Pressure from
“normalize” their sex into the prescribed categories of male and Western governments and (Western dominated) international
female. organizations to change local legislation, or attitudes, can be
perceived as the imposition of foreign values, much as occurred
Through 2030 LGBTI issues around the world will continue during the colonial era.34 Defying the West, by maintaining or
to largely be framed within this narrative of sexuality, sex, and strengthening anti-LGBTI policies, can also be perceived as a
gender as being defined in either-or categories rather than means of exerting sovereignty and independence. However,
spectrums, though challenges to this perception will begin to such practices overlook other factors. First, the existence of
emerge. indigenous LGBTI movements within the post-colonial context.
There are many LGBTI advocates and movements working to
Legacy of colonialism improve their own conditions and operating independently of
Western actors. Next, many of the anti-LGBTI movements in
The social exclusion of LGBTI individuals is neither universal post-colonial countries are being supported by Western
through history or across cultures. So how then did it grow actors.35 In particular, far-right Christian organizations in the
to become so pervasive? Many scholars have argued that United States have been very active in proselytizing, training
colonialism was a leading mechanism in the diffusion of Christian religious leaders, and lobbying governments towards their
Europe’s perceptions of sexuality and the accompanying value highly conservative views. For many years to come, there will
judgments and legal restrictions. During the Late Middle Ages the continue to be this competition between actors to define the
Catholic Church and then secular powers began a widespread place of LGBTI individuals in the post-colonial world.
campaign against sodomy that would shape norms around the
world for centuries to come. Sex for procreation was acceptable, A subtler impact of colonialism on LGBTI issues is the legacy
while all other forms were deemed “unnatural acts” such as anal of language. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa there is a
sex and oral sex. However, such legal or social prohibitions were large divide between the LGBTI movements in anglophone and
most often applied to homosexual relations, and between men in francophone countries. In English speaking countries, advocates
particular. These Western norms of sexual behavior were spread have access to a greater amount of research, training, funding,
around the world during the colonial era between the 15th and etc. The growing dominance of the English language in science
20th centuries. However, during this period, the Age of Reason and among international organizations is an asset to those
came to Europe. Many Enlightenment thinkers sought to lift the who speak it, but can serve to exclude those who do not. This
religious restrictions of the Dark Ages. Following the French trend will continue, placing a linguistic barrier to local LGBTI
Revolution, for example, the new legal codes (1791) removed organizations in non-anglophone countries that are looking
prohibitions against same-sex relations. Such values and laws for international support or to network outside their linguistic
were then diffused to the French colonies. region.
12
Familiarity
Humans far too often fear that which is different and unknown.
Discrimination is, by definition, based on the perceived difference
between people. With increased contact comes familiarity, which
reduces implicit bias and intergroup anxiety.36 Strategies for
reducing other forms of discrimination, like racism, recommend
direct contact between groups. Additional indirect contact is
important where individuals see positive interactions between
members of their group with those of another.37 Research based
on this premise has found that a ten-minute conversation with
a trans- or nontrans-canvasser was enough to reduce bias and
even change political behavior.38 Trends like urbanization and
globalization are already increasing intergroup contact around
the world. LGBTI populations may tend to cluster in enclaves
like other minority groups; however, they come from across all
demographic backgrounds. Consequently, they have family,
friends, coworkers, classmates, etc. who are not LGBTI. This
encourages intergroup contact at a much faster rate than with
ethnic or religious minorities who can remain largely segregated
from each other. Contact will increase exponentially as more
LGBTI individuals come forward to their family, friends, and
communities and in so doing make it easier for others to do
the same. With this will come greater familiarity and a decline in
bias and exclusion. Therefore, it is expected that through 2030,
greater contact and familiarity with LGBTI individuals will reduce
prejudice.

13
Critical uncertainties in LGBTI
social exclusion
How the following factors will shape the evolution of LGBTI Religious acceptance
social exclusion is less predictable. Each driver could unfold in
more than one possible way in the future. The combination of Religion is widely used as a justification for the social exclusion
these outcomes will shape the future context for LGBTI social and discrimination of LGBTI individuals. None of the major
exclusion. world religions is exempt from this. Even some Buddhist
majority countries, like Myanmar, actively persecute the LGBTI
Stigmatization community.45 The Islamic world is the most consistently anti-
LGBTI of the major religions.46 The varying levels of acceptance
Broadly defined, a stigma is an identifying characteristic that shown in other religions demonstrates an underlying trend:
socially devalues the bearer, while stigmatization is the process tolerance of LGBTI individuals is more associated with how
by which that trait affects the bearer’s life.39 The concept has religious a society is, not what religion a society is. Research
been incorporated into the fields of psychology and sociology has demonstrated this negative correlation between this level
to understand how certain individuals or groups are marked of religiosity47 and LGBTI acceptance. The more religion is
for social exclusion and discrimination. The process occurs central to people’s lives, the less likely they are to be accepting
through a series of steps. First, humans differentiate each other of LGBTI individuals. For example, Muslim majority countries
based on differences. Some of these differences are linked show very low levels of public acceptance towards LGBTI
to negative stereotypes. Individuals so marked are ascribed individuals, because countries are also very religious. While
to belonging to an out-group, which is placed separate and Christian majority countries have a very wide range in the level
inferior to the in-group. As such, their social exclusion and of acceptance, because these rates vary with how religious the
discrimination becomes normalized and legitimized.40 Across country is. A couple of exceptions to this trend exist, such as
much of the world, identifying with being identified as LGBTI is a Brazil and the Philippines being more accepting than would
stigma. LGBTI individuals are ascribed with negative attributes, be expected, and Russia being far less so.48 It must be noted
differentiated from the wider hetero-normative society, and then that there is a correlation, and not necessarily a causation,
face prejudice and discrimination. between religiosity and LGBTI acceptance. While greater social
acceptance corresponds to more secular societies, the latter
Stigma also takes two forms: social stigma and self-stigma. The is also related to levels of economic development and cultural
former operates as described above whereby society marks and globalization.
negatively interacts with stigmatized individuals. Self-stigma,
alternatively, is where the stigmatized individual internalizes Other research has found that while most forms of religiosity
the stereotypes and value judgements about them. Such exhibit less acceptance, there is at least one form that is tied
individuals often exhibit depression and self-isolation,41 while to more positive views of LGBTI individuals.49 This was a “quest”
also behaving in ways that reinforce prejudicial expectations religious orientation, characterized by the searching for spiritual
about them.42 Overcoming the LGBTI stigma therefore requires truths and accepting that ultimate truths may never be known
addressing both social perception and how LGBTI individuals (as opposed to intrinsic orientations where an individual finds
perceive themselves. Many LGBTI advocacy groups also work meaning through living in accord with religious orthodoxy, and
on promoting the health and wellbeing of this community by extrinsic orientations where religious adherence is used to
focusing on these issues of promoting self-esteem and mental obtain non-spiritual ends). There are thus ways to reconcile
health along with a positive group identity.43 religion with LGBTI inclusion. It is religious tradition, rather than
spirituality, that often leads to the social exclusion of LGBTI
Stigmas are continually redefined through their unique cultural individuals.
context.44 As a result, how they may evolve is subject to great
uncertainty. While there has been international progress in The degree to which religion continues to define life in some
destigmatizing the LGBTI community, how this will continue to countries and the potential for religious institutions to integrate
progress and how it will shape local stigma is far from clear, inclusive approaches into tradition and practice is an uncertainty
especially, considering reactionary efforts by conservative over the outlook period.
elements within societies who are mobilized by the increased
visibility of LGBTI individuals. Additionally, social and self-stigma
may follow different courses. International LGBTI advocacy
campaigns and advances in information technology could
encourage self-acceptance among LGBTI individuals in the
developing world long before wider social acceptance is realized.
14
Media representation
Media depictions, in film, song, the news, etc., are an important The imbalance in LGBTI media portrayals between the West and
force in shaping how individuals conceptualize and value other non-West feeds into the othering of domestic LGBTI groups.
groups of people, especially ones that are not familiar. As such, As the majority of LGBTI media mainstreaming comes from the
media representations are a leading force in the creation of West, LGBTI advocates in developing countries are at risk of
stereotypes about LGBTI individuals. Stereotypes link stigmas being perceived as surrogates of Western powers and acting
to negative perceptions that lead to the devaluation and to promote foreign values.52 Such beliefs ignore the rise of
social exclusion of individuals so marked. The nature of these indigenous LGBTI rights movements and marginalize them as
stereotypes is therefore an important determinate in how not reflecting the changes occurring within their own societies.
individuals will be viewed and treated within their society. The An increase in non-Western media representation would help
media is a leading institution in shaping societal stereotypes to correct this misperception and serve to normalize LGBTI
on differentiated groups of people. How LGBTI individuals individuals within their own specific cultural context.
are portrayed in news coverage, television shows, music, etc.,
strongly influences the values that are then ascribed to them. Visibility is an important step in removing negative stereotypes
The media can portray such people positively or negatively. and beginning to erase the divide between LGBTI and
However, if the media provides no visibility then that too serves heteronormative social division. Western LGBTI movements
to alienate LGBTI people as being deviant from societal norms have successfully used visibility in their campaigns. When
and provides the space for negative stereotypes to persist. individuals openly come out as LGBTI, they then force the
existing political and social power structures to recognize them
In the West, LGBTI individuals still receive limited but increasing and their grievances. This is not without risks. There is a very
representation. For example, in the US film industry, 18.4% of the real risk of being socially excluded, discriminated against, or
releases by major studios in 2016 contained a LGBTI character, even violently attacked for those early LGBTI leaders. Along
up from 17.5% the previous year. However, nearly half of those these lines, the public outing of LGBTI individuals is often a
characters had less than one minute of screen time. In fact, weapon used to harm and exclude them from civic engagement.
only 7.2% of the films had an LGBTI character who was vital Increasing LGBTI visibility can also risk a conservative backlash.
to the plot line and whose character was based primarily on Many of the new anti-LGBTI policies are attempts to suppress
their sexual orientation or gender identity. Additionally, of the emerging LGBTI acceptance. However, without taking action to
LGBTI characters, most were white gay men, with still even publicly define their own identities, others will define it for them.
more limited representation of lesbians, bisexuals, transgender A balance is needed between protecting LGBTI advocates and
individuals, and LGBTI people of color.50 creating LGBTI visibility.
Recommendations exist for how to positively portray LGBTI Social media is also providing a new platform for LGBTI
people in the media. The following suggestions can contribute individuals. The new technology now allows them to directly
to reducing the social exclusion of this group51: produce media. Conventional media can then be bypassed and
thus no longer controls LGBTI portrayals. Competing voices can
•• Employ the right vocabulary, language, and terminology. challenge entrenched stereotypes as individuals seek to define
themselves. It also provides for greater anonymity and safety,
•• Avoid specific language that stigmatizes LGBTI people, which allows LGBTI individuals to be more truthful in their self-
such as derogatory terms. expression, without the same fear of social repercussions.
•• Avoid focusing on medical issues. The representation of LGBTI individuals and communities in
the conventional media (either positively or negatively) and
•• Avoid implying that being of a specific sexual orientation the plurality of ways in which social media could be employed
makes one part of a “high-risk group” for sexually to challenge stigmatization and the dominant heteronormative
transmitted diseases. narrative (or reinforce it) can significantly affect the future of
LGBTI social exclusion. As a result, the evolution of this driver is
•• Avoid stereotyping specific sexual orientations, such as highly impactful but uncertain.
bisexuality, as being promiscuous.
15
Political scapegoating
Around the world there are many examples of political leaders The political scapegoating of the LGBTI community can also
using homophobia as a political tool, often along with other encourage institutional discrimination. Politicians who accuse
forms of discrimination, to distract the public from corruption them of being a public threat often want to be then seen as doing
and failures of governance.53 Its use is particularly common something about it. This can lead to the passing of legislation
among more authoritarian and/or ethnonational governments that allows for disenfranchisement, repression of political rights,
who maintain support by creating social divisions between or criminalization. Recent examples can be found in Russia,
their base and other segments of the population. Such leaders Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Egypt, Morocco, Indonesia,
justify their political scapegoating as a defense of public Brunei, and Nigeria.55
morality, public health, or traditional values. In some countries,
it is also a means to show that they are not beholden to the At the most extreme, political scapegoating can lead to violence,
West and former colonial powers. The rise in nationalism and sexual violence, and killings, often in ways that are noted as
the mainstreaming of nationalist policies in many countries being especially brutal. By labeling LGBTI individuals a threat to
across the globe accentuates the dynamics of political othering, society, politicians can normalize family violence against them
including against LGBTI individuals and groups, worsening a and encourage institutional persecution. In such contexts, they
political culture of intolerance. are often targeted by family or community members, nationalist
or religious extremists, or police.56 Furthermore, there can be a
Political leaders can shape the social narrative around sexuality culture of impunity, or complicity, where such hate crimes go
and gender. When they differentiate LGBTI individuals or label uninvestigated by the state.
them a threat, it furthers their social exclusion and discrimination.
It can be socially expected to deny LGBTI individuals access
to education, employment, housing, and healthcare.54 In fact, in
dealing with an LGBTI individual, one would then be violating
social norms and stigmatized by association.
16
Criminalization
Criminalization of same-sex relations is a direct form of social There has been a general trend internationally in repealing laws
exclusion. However, such laws also serve to define how LGBTI criminalizing same-sex sexual behavior, with 20 states having
people are viewed and by extension treated, even if they are done so since 2006. Despite this, there is also a counter-trend
not enforced. The state holds, arguably, the greatest normative of new anti-LGBTI laws being passed, such as in Uganda66,
power of any social institution. The criminalization of an act India67, and Nigeria.68 Other states, such as Indonesia69, have
is to define it as a threat to the wellbeing of the society and had similar legislation proposed. While same-sex relations were
shapes the norms surrounding it. So, while criminalization is a decriminalized in Russia in 1993, in 2013 the government passed
direct form of exclusion, it also serves to legitimize and promote legislation outlawing “gay propaganda” that has since been used
a broader social exclusionary environment. In such instances, to suppress political campaigning and broader LGBTI rights.70 In
LGBTI individuals face the risk of legal sanction but also extra- the United States, in 2017 alone, over 100 anti-LGBTI bills were
legal and community violence, human rights abuses, and broader proposed at the sub-national level.71 There are two common
social exclusion.57 themes in these instances. First, they are often followed by
broader social violence and discrimination that is legitimized by
The criminalization of same-sex relations is most prevalent in the state’s normative stance. Second, they often result from a
Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia.58 As of 2017, there are backlash against the rising visibility and standing of the LGBTI
72 states that criminalize LGBTI relations.59 The severity and community by reactionary elements within the country. So, while
enforcement of these laws varies greatly. In many countries, there is a general trend towards the decriminalization of the
even the political discussion around LGBTI rights is barred as a LGBTI community, there is also the possibility for counter-trends
threat to public morality or as propaganda that harms children. to undermine these gains. As such, there are different possible
These “morality” laws are common throughout the Arab states, futures that this driver may take.
while about 10% of all countries have some form of “propaganda”
law.60 These laws extend beyond the targeting of LGBTI
individuals to include those who advocate for LGBTI rights.61
Civil society organizations can have their funding blocked,
materials confiscated, or even be forced to shut down.62 Such
laws aim to reduce freedom of speech and assembly, intimidate
activists, and are established to exclude sexual orientation from
public debate, setting the context for continued social exclusion
or even persecution.
Figure 3. Laws against same-sex practice by maximum sentence. 63
17
Figure 4. Laws against same-sex practice by maximum sentence. 64
Figure 5 Laws against same -sex practice by whether it targets men and women or only men.65
18
The following figures are intended to give a sense of the scope Comparing the level of criminalization to the population of
of the threat facing this population. They are calculated based those countries reveals the extent and severity of the threat.
on the population of countries with sexual orientation laws, The following table shows the severity of the penalty for those
multiplied by the estimates of the LGBTI population in the who could be legally prosecuted for their sexual behavior. The
country, and accounting for if the laws target men and women most common penalty is 15 years to life in prison, followed by
or only men. These figures only include those who are being 8 to 14 years.
criminalized by their own government and do not include the
presumably far greater number who face social persecution, or
issues of discrimination. The total number of LGBTI individuals
in the world who face criminalization is estimated between 7
million and 400 million, which is approximately equivalent to
the total populations of Sierra Leone on the low end and East
Africa on the high end.72 The number who could face execution
is likely from 645 thousand to 36 million, roughly the current
population of the city of Washington DC or the whole of Canada.
Table 1. The global number of people estimated to be in violation of sexual behavioral laws, by maximum penalty.
Maximum penalty (implemented) Low estimate (0.25%of population) High estimate (14% of population)
Death penalty 645,000 36,100,000
15 years to life imprisonment 3,859,000 216,120,000
8 to 14 years years imprisonment 1,227,000 68,720,000
3 to 7 years imprisonment 828,000 46,360,000
1 month to 2 years imprisonment 560,000 31,390,000
Total 7,119,000 398,680,000
19
The share of the global population living under laws against same sex practice by level of maximum penalty
3%
Death penalty
21%
15 years to life imprisonment
8 to 14 years imprisonment
3 to 7 years imprisonment
1 month to 2 years imprisonment
9% Not a crime
59%
5%
3%
Figure 6. The share of the global population living under Laws against same -sex practice by level of maximum penalty.
The existence of legal prohibitions against same-sex behavior Criminalization of same-sex behavior is only one aspect of social
does not mean that they are regularly enforced. Only a small exclusion. It is a very direct and apparent manifestation. However,
fraction of these populations may actually be arrested or social exclusion also operates in many other subtler ways. For
imprisoned. Enforcement also varies extensively by location the nearly 60% of the global population who is not affected by
and the political climate. Additionally, not all LGBTI individuals these laws, social exclusion is still a very real crisis. There are
face the same risks. Men are more often targeted than women, likely hundreds of millions of LGBTI individuals in the world, and
gays more than bisexuals, and transgender more than cisgender nearly all of them face some degree of social exclusion.
individuals. However, such criminalization still creates a climate
of fear under which LGBTI people must live, and shapes the
social values attached to their sexual or gender identities.
They are then more likely to be socially excluded because
they technically engage in criminal acts, and so may be denied
employment, housing, healthcare and access to other basic
services. Additionally, they are more vulnerable to extortion,
exploitation, sexual assault, and hate crimes.
20
Scenarios
Building from the drivers outlined above four scenarios have Humanitarian actors are defined as all actors who contribute
been created. The scenarios are not intended to be a prediction to humanitarian action.73 This includes but is not limited to;
of the future. Rather they describe a range of plausible futures. international and national NGOs, the United Nations, national
Each describes how LGBTI social exclusion might look, from governments, civil society organizations, donors and private
the perspective of a given country, in the year 2030. As there sector actors.
is great variation around the world in how countries treat their
LGBTI population, different scenarios can play out at the same
time in different countries. Intentionally avoided were any
scenarios that were entirely optimistic or pessimistic, so as to
show a range of challenges that could be faced in promoting
LGBTI social inclusion. The purpose of this exercise is to help
provide insight into how the future might look so that decision
makers can begin planning now for the range of possibilities
they may face in the near future. To this end, after each scenario
is a brief description of its implications and how humanitarian
actors could position themselves to support the social inclusion
of LGBTI individuals in line with the Sustainable Development
Goals’ ‘leave no one behind’ agenda.
Table 2. Summary table of the scenario logics.
Scenarios
Slow going Progress and persecution Hollow victories Institutions as leaders
Constructions
of sexual Sexuality, sex and gender will largely be viewed as immutable dichotomies
classifications
Heavy trends
Legacy of
Colonial legacy weakens; nation’s decisions are their own
colonialism
Familiarity Greater familiarity leads to decreased social exclusion
Media
Negative stereotyping Positive stereotyping Positive stereotyping Negative stereotyping
representation
Social stigma remains

Stigma Social stigma decreases Social stigma remains pervasive Social stigma remains pervasive
Axes of uncertainty
pervasive
No change in religious No change in religious

Religion No change in religious acceptance Religious acceptance
acceptance acceptance
Criminalization Criminalization remains Criminalization remains Decrease in criminalization Decrease in criminalization
Scapegoating No scapegoating Scapegoating No scapegoating No scapegoating
21
1. Slow going
Gradual progress is being made towards the social inclusion Implications for LGBTI individuals in 2030:
of LGBTI individuals in the country, but the achievement of
that goal still remains far off. LGBTI individuals are becoming •• LGBTI individuals have been left behind at the close of
more visible in their communities, making them seem less the SDGs. Their rights are being systematically ignored,
different than other members of society. They are becoming more resulting in limited overall improvement in the development
tolerated and incidents of hate crimes and police harassment indicators for this vulnerable population.
have dropped. However, social stigmas remain persistent and
they are not fully accepted either. These perceptions are slow Indicators that would show if a country is heading along
to change and a number of systemic barriers create inertia to the path outlined in this scenario:
progress. Domestic media continues to negatively stereotype
them, while the few positive portrayals are foreign and less • No major changes from current trends.
identifiable. The dominant religious traditions in the country also
continue to shape the public’s perception on sexuality. While Opportunities to advance LGBTI social inclusion:
the government is not actively persecuting LGBTI individuals,
it is not acting to normalize them either. For instance, colonial • No major actors are actively working against LGBTI
era laws remain that criminalize same-sex relations but they are interests.
not enforced. These three leading institutions (media, religion
and government) exert a great deal of power over how society • A wide range of interventions are still possible.
views and values these people. Until they begin to change, more
substantive progress in social inclusion is not realized. • Humanitarian actors can assist by leveraging their existing
presence and positive reputation in the country, working
with local partners on service provision and advocacy.
Threats to progress on LGBTI social inclusion:
• The government and other social institutions are not

providing assistance, which places a greater burden on
LGBTI activists and humanitarian organizations.
•• Space for humanitarian actors to program directly for LGBTI

engagement is still subject to significant and repeated
disruption as laws are applied erratically.
•• International actors could be perceived as outsiders

engaging in cultural imperialism.

22
2. Progress and persecution
Social inclusion of LGBTI individuals is increasing, but the Indicators that would show if a country is heading along
government is reactively persecuting them. The LGBTI the path outlined in this scenario:
community in the country is making strong progress in gaining
social acceptance. They are becoming less stigmatized in large • More positive media representations.
part because of greater visibility within their communities, more
positive domestic media portrayals, and the spread of Western • Decrease in social stigma.
ideas challenging views on sexuality and gender. However, in
reaction, the government increases persecution of the LGBTI • Political scapegoating.
community. While framed as a campaign to defend traditional
values and against neo-colonialism, most see it as a move Opportunities to advance LGBTI social inclusion:
by an unpopular regime trying to shore up support among
its conservative base and distract from its corruption and • Potential to leverage domestic public support to change
failures of governance. The administration passes vague laws government policy.
criminalizing “immoral” or “unnatural” acts. Political leaders also
make statements condoning extra-legal attacks on suspected • Private sector actors, particularly multinational companies,
homosexuals. Social divisions in the country widen between can use their position within the country to advance
more progressive and conservative populations. While the equality by implementing rights charters and education
current situation is dire, the social conditions are in place for programs (within legal limits).
long-term progress if the current administration is politically
constrained or democratically overturned. • International and national NGOs can collaborate and
support civil society partners, though they will still be
Implications for LGBTI individuals in 2030: limited by the legal environment, to support the trend to
greater acceptance.
• LGBTI individuals achieve greater acceptance in their
communities and among society in general. However, they Threats to progress on LGBTI social inclusion:
are also at risk of arbitrary arrest and hate crimes. Even for
those not directly victimized, the climate of fear negatively • The government is not a partner and is actively working
impacts all their other wellbeing indicators. against LGBTI inclusion.
• Depending on the political party in power, the climate could

be increasingly restricted as LGBTI inclusion is a polarizing
issue.
• The continued hostile political and legal environment

creates challenges for humanitarian actors to create and
implement programming directed at improving development
indicators and opportunities for LGBTI individuals.
23
3. Hollow victories
Despite major progress towards LGBTI inclusion, the Opportunities to advance LGBTI social inclusion:
goal remains unattained. Many of the objectives believed
necessary to promoting LGBTI social inclusion have been • Advocacy and programming can leverage the greater
accomplished. National LGBTI movements are based on visibility towards promoting greater acceptance by the
campaigns used in Western countries. LGBTI movements and public, government, and religious organizations.
individuals are becoming more outspoken and visible to show
their communities that they are just like the rest of society. • Humanitarian actors can make real investments in
There are more positive portrayals of LGBTI people domestically, improving the lived reality of LGBTI individuals through
unlike years past when role models were all foreign, showing collaborative programming on livelihoods, education and
that national and sexual identities need not be exclusive. LGBTI healthcare.
movements are succeeding in promoting reforms to repeal
restrictions on sexual orientation and gender identity that have • The “leave no one behind” agenda is mobilized to push
persisted since the colonial era. Despite all these victories by governments to close the gap between commitments and
the LGBTI community, social inclusion has yet to be realized. implementation of policies and programs.
Stigmas still stubbornly persist and the dominant religious
traditions in the country range from indifferent to antagonistic. Threats to progress on LGBTI social inclusion:
While individuals may learn to be more accepting, social values
are too deeply ingrained. Real progress will likely not come until • Social exclusion may remain for many more years. It may
the next generation, or the one after that. take a generational shift in value before wider inclusion is
possible.
Implications for LGBTI individuals in 2030:
• Limited cooperation from domestic institutions towards
• Despite the decline in institutional discrimination, LGBTI meeting the “leave no one behind” agenda.
individuals are still largely socially excluded. Economic and
health outcomes remain low, resulting in a failure of the • While progress is made, commitments by international
‘leave no one behind’ agenda for the SDGs. organizations and companies are undermined domestically
to limit their implementation.
Indicators that would show if a country is heading along
the path outlined in this scenario:
• More positive media representations.
• Decrease in criminal prohibitions against same-sex

relations.

24
4. Institutions as leaders
States and religious bodies in the country are leading in Opportunities to advance LGBTI social inclusion:
the promotion of social inclusion of LGBTI individuals.
Political, religious, and other social leaders cooperate to define • The climate is ripe for advocacy and programming efforts
their nation in the modern world, free it from its colonial legacy, from humanitarian actors to educate the public on LGBTI
and take greater responsibility for its values and institutions. issues.
Instead of rejecting any foreign ideas, these leaders seek to
adopt the best practices from around the world. Inspired by • Partnerships can be formed with institutional partners and
current perspectives on sexuality, sex, and gender, institutional civil society to shift public perceptions of LGBTI individuals.
reforms are made to promote greater inclusion of all the nation’s
citizenry. Educational campaigns are launched to educate the • Private sector actors can lead in the implementation of
public about LGBTI issues. The government issues legislative non-discrimination policies and processes, laying the
reforms to dismantle any laws or policies that discriminate on foundation for a more inclusive culture.
the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity. National
religious leaders push their faiths towards a message of • Humanitarian actors have greater space to support
acceptance and tolerance. While these dominant establishments institutional efforts to provide protections for LGBTI
carry great influence, they cannot change values overnight. individuals without fear of persecution.
Negative stereotyping of LGBTI individuals is still commonplace
and it still carries a social stigma. Yet the institutional framework • Humanitarian actors can exploit the support from social
is in place to allow for greater social inclusion and protections institutions and the new legal framework to empower LGBTI
that should come with time. individuals and program to support livelihoods, education
and healthcare.
Implications for LGBTI individuals in 2030:
• Institutional acceptance and protections have been Threats to progress on LGBTI social inclusion:
achieved. There is greater progress towards SDG indicators
for LGBTI groups, but the persistence of stigma limits • Social prejudices remain as cultural change takes a
improvements to health and economic outcomes. significant amount of time.
Indicators that would show if a country is heading along • Though they have greater institutional protection, LGBTI
the path outlined in this scenario: individuals are still subjected to acts of violence and
discrimination.
• Greater acceptance from religious institutions.
• Progress could result in complacency even without full
• Funding is allocated for educational campaigns. inclusion being achieved.
• Decrease in criminal prohibitions against same-sex

relations.
25
Conclusion
This study focuses on building an outlook for LGBTI social In fact, these are the issues that typically have more of a direct
exclusion to 2030. A long-term outlook is necessary as the impact on the lives of LGBTI people. The reason they were not
persecution of LGBTI communities worldwide is a protracted discussed more is because these were found to be outputs
humanitarian crisis:74 It will not be quickly resolved and of the system of interactions that drive social exclusion. By
challenging the drivers of social exclusion requires sustained addressing the factors at the heart that system, these ones will
leadership and investment. The resolution of the crisis – where change too. As such, they are the objectives that can be reached
all persons are treated equally and with dignity regardless of by achieving the larger program goals.
their gender or sexual orientation – requires structural changes
in many societies, legally, culturally, and socially. The “leave no This report also attempts to shed light on the scale of the
one behind” agenda of the Sustainable Development Goals will problem facing LGBTI individuals. There have been few
not be achieved without addressing the structural inequalities attempts to even estimate the number of LGBTI people in the
that systematically disenfranchise LGBTI individuals. world. We conclude that there are likely hundreds of millions
of LGBTI people, with nearly all of them facing some degree
This report describes four scenarios of how LGBTI social of social exclusion. It is easy to see humanitarian crises when
exclusion could look in 2030 from the perspective of a given they affect everyone in a certain region or when an ethnic or
country. The scenarios depict a range of plausible futures, each religious minority is being persecuted. Yet, it is easy to overlook
with their own challenges and opportunities. A central intent the suffering of LGBTI individuals because they are dispersed
of this report is to encourage thinking on how the future may around the world, representing a small minority of any given
differ from today. It is important to avoid a fixed idea of what population. However, if we think of them collectively, they are a
the future holds. Doing so leads to a rigidity in planning that very large and vulnerable group.
can leave actors unprepared to handle unexpected change. The
use of scenarios, assists planning on LGBTI issues by depicting LGBTI individuals experience lower development outcomes
different futures. Policy-makers can use these to see how their because social exclusion prevents them from participating in
strategy would fair against a range of contingencies and identify social, economic and political life to the same degree as others.
programming objectives that can lead towards a preferred They do not have the same access to employment, education,
future. housing, healthcare, legal protections, social entitlements, etc.
As a result, they are left in a more vulnerable position compared
This report additionally discusses the central drivers of change to non-LGBTI individuals of their community. Additionally, in
that will shape LGBTI social exclusion through 2030. Three crisis contexts, this additional layer of vulnerability is often not
factors considered how heavy trends will continue to shape accounted for by humanitarian actors when assessing risk. As
the issue over this period: how we conceive sexuality, the such, the humanitarian sector needs to consider how more can
legacy of colonialism, and the level of interaction the general be done to promote LGBTI social inclusion, which will in turn
public has with LGBTI individuals. However, these trends could build resilience among this vulnerable group. The leave “no
change over a longer span of time, especially through long-term one behind agenda” for the Sustainable Development Goals is
programming. critical to advance progress in how donors, UN agencies, and
NGOs can work with civil society and governments to ensure
The other factors have less certain future outcomes and so the integration of LGBTI-inclusive dimensions in humanitarian
are considered critical uncertainties. Stigmatization, religious action.
acceptance and political scapegoating are factors that have
high influence throughout the system of interactions that
contribute to LGBTI social exclusion. However, these are more
difficult factors for actors to change within the next twelve years.
So, they should be long-term goals. Criminal prohibitions and
media representation are also very influential factors, but ones
that can be more effectively influenced. They then represent
good short-term goals that could leverage systemic change.
This report also included seven additional factors that were

part of the analysis but not discussed in detail: workplace
discrimination, rejection by family or community, denial of marriage
rights, poverty, association with illegal or immoral behaviour,
perception of cause or responsibility and discrimination by or
against healthcare workers. Such factors are still very important.
26
Annex: Scenario analysis methods
System Architecture
15 drivers of LGBTI social exclusion
Impact- Uncertainty Matrix
3 heavy trends 12 critical uncertainties
MICMAC Matrix
7 critical uncertainties with 5 critical uncertainties with

low influence on system high influence
Hypothesis Matrix
Scenarios
Figure 7. Diagram of the scenario analysis methods.
27
Scenario analysis methods
The report uses scenario analysis to present an outlook on Step 2: Impact-uncertainty matrix
LGBTI social exclusion through 2030. A scenario is a narrative
description of one of many possible futures. They are used to The Impact-Uncertainty Matrix is a central tool for scenario
break our assumption of what the future will look like. They also planning. It entails ranking each driver based on its impact on the
serve to help manage uncertainty about the future and thereby research topic and the uncertainty of its development through
support informed decision-making and strategic planning. The the reference period. Impact refers to how strong the effect
scenarios are developed by using a series of structured analytical (positive or negative) of this driver is on LGBTI social exclusion.
techniques to identify what the major drivers of change are, and Uncertainty refers to how predictable the development of this
the different ways in which they could shape the future. The factor will be through 2030. That is to say, can we anticipate
IARAN has developed the following analytical framework for use with confidence its trend and impact over the coming years?
in the humanitarian sector. The following section describes its For example, over the next twelve years it is fairly certain that
use in this report. most people around the world will still define sex as a binary
between men and women. Alternatively, media representations
Step 1: System architecture of LGBTI individuals could change in several different ways over
that period.
The architecture is a conceptual representation of the system
being studied. It is used to determine what elements are to be After each driver is ranked, the results are graphed to create
included in the analysis. Drivers of LGBTI social exclusion were the matrix shown below. Based on the location of the driver in
selected based on a literature review. Techniques were used to the matrix, the drivers are divided into two categories. The first
encourage a comprehensive selection. A PESTEL framework is Heavy Trends (blue). These are the drivers that will strongly
was used to consider drivers from the political, economic, social, influence LGBTI social exclusion and that had a clear trajectory
technological, environmental, and legal spheres. Additional over the outlook period. These typically have held a consistent
scales were considered from the individual to the systemic. trend for decades and so will presumably continue to maintain
Using these approaches, 15 drivers were included in the analysis. their course in the coming years barring a major systemic change.
These heavy trends are described in detail on pages 18-19. The
other category is Critical Uncertainties (orange). These are
the drivers impacting LGBTI social exclusion whose trajectory
over time is not clearly defined. These critical uncertainties will
be used in the following step.
Impact-Uncertainty Matrix
9
High
8 Cri Pov PS
RFC
7 CSC AIB Sti DHW
PCR
6 LCL LIF NRM RA
WDU
MPR
5
Heavy Trends Critical Uncertainties
Impact
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Low Uncertainty High
Figure 8. Impact-Uncertainty Matrix.
28
Table 3. Ranking used in the Impact-Uncertainty Matrix and resulting classification.
Driver Code Uncertainty Impact
Construction of sexual
CSC 3 7
classifications
Heavy trends Legacy of colonialism LCL 2 6
Level of interaction and

LIF 3 6
familiarity
Association with illegal or

AIB 4 7
immoral behavior
Media representation MR 4 6
Workplace discrimination and

WDU 4 6
unemployment
Criminalization Cri 4 8
Marriage and parental rights MPR 4 6
Perception of cause/
PCR 4 6
responsibility
Critical uncertainties
Stigmatization Sti 5 7
Rejection by family/community RFC 5 7
Poverty Pov 6 8
Discrimination by or against
DHW 6 7
healthcare workers
Religious acceptance RA 6 6
Political scapegoating PS 8 8
29
Step 3: MICMAC
The MICMAC (Impact Matrix Cross-Reference Multiplication Dependent drivers are outputs of the system as they have a
Applied to a Classification) is an analysis technique to understand high level of dependence and low level of influence and as such
the relational influence of drivers with one another. Here it has are sensitive to changes in the system. As a result, these are not
been used to assess the critical uncertainties. These drivers are recommended as targets for actors but can be useful indicators
entered into a double input chart where they were listed along of the amelioration (or not) of the crisis.
both the x- and y-axes. The degree of influence each driver has
on every other is then ranked (from 0-3). The resulting table • Association with illegal or immoral behavior
of values can then be used to classify each driver based on its
net influence (the sum of its influence on all other drivers) and • Rejection by family/community
dependence (the sum of all other drivers’ influence on it). The
results are then presented as an influence-dependence matrix. • Workplace discrimination and unemployment
Based on the quadrant it fell into, each driver was classified
as one of the four following: determinant, relay, dependent or • Marriage and parental rights
autonomous.
• Discrimination by or against healthcare workers
Determinant drivers are inputs to the system as they have a
high level of influence over and a low level of dependence on Autonomous drivers are largely outside the system as they
the other drivers. They are often entry points to the system, have low influence and dependence. Acting on them will not
whose direction will shape the rest of the system and as such, influence the rest of the drivers, nor will changing the system
they are crucial elements in determining its dynamics. These significantly impact them.
drivers have a strong impact on the other drivers but are not
influenced much in return. As such, they are important to watch •• Perception of cause/responsibility
for as they will have a considerable direct and indirect impact
on the system surrounding LGBTI social exclusion. They have •• Poverty
a high degree of inertia and so often represent longer-term
program goals rather than short-term objectives. The Critical Uncertainties classified as Determinant or Relay are
discussed in more depth in the following sections, as they are
•• Stigmatization the most influential and at the heart of the system of interactions
driving LGBTI social exclusion. They are also used as the basis of
•• Religious acceptance the scenarios, as described in the following steps. The remaining
drivers, Dependent and Autonomous, are not explored further
•• Political scapegoating given the scope of the report, though they are important issues
worthy of further consideration.
Relay drivers have a high degree of influence and dependence
on the other drivers. As a result, actions on them are transmitted
throughout the system. This makes them sources of instability,
but also areas to target to influence the system as a whole,
including determinant drivers. These are recommended as
areas to target for intervention because they are susceptible
to change and will in turn have a cascading effect through the
system, affecting both drivers up and downstream.
•• Media representation
• Criminalization
30
High
Influence-Dependence Matrix
29
NRM
Sti
RA
Cri
Determinant Drivers Relay Drivers
PS
Influence
14.5
PCR AIB
Dependent Drivers RFC

Autonomous Drivers
WDU
MPR
Low DHW
0
Pov
6 14 High 22
Dependence
Figure 9. Influence-Dependence Matrix.
Table 4. Sum scores from the Influence-Dependence Matrix and resulting classification.
Driver Code Dependence Influence
Stigmatization Sti 12 27
Determinant drivers Religious acceptance RA 12 26
Political scapegoating PS 6 17
Media representation MR 16 29
Relay drivers
Criminalization Cri 19 23
Association with illegal or

AIB 20 11
immoral behaviour
Rejection by family/community RFC 19 9
Workplace discrimination and

Dependent drivers WDU 18 3
unemployment
Marriage and parental rights MPR 15 2
Discrimination by or against
DHW 22 0
healthcare workers
Perception of cause/
PCR 8 11
responsibility
Autonomous drivers
Poverty Pov 9 0
31
Step 4: Hypothesis matrix
The five drivers classified as Determinant or Relay form the axes The scenarios all share common assumptions taken from the
of the scenarios. These 5 drivers are described in detail on Heavy Trends.
pages 20-26. As the future outcome of each is uncertain,
there could be multiple possibilities. In the hypothesis matrix, •• Sexuality, sex, and gender will largely be viewed as
the drivers are listed in a column and two probable future immutable dichotomies.
outcomes (hypotheses) are presented alongside in the row.
With five drivers, each with two possible outcomes, there are •• Colonial legal legacy weakens; nations’ decisions are their
then 32 possible combinations. A morphological analysis was own.
then used to select four of these combinations based on logical
consistency and to capture as diverse a range as possible. •• Greater familiarity with LGBTI individuals leads to decreased
These four combinations then form the basis of the scenarios. social exclusion
Table 5. Hypothesis matrix.
Driver Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2
Media representation Positive stereotyping Negative stereotyping
Stigma Social stigma remains positive Social stigma decreases
Religion Religious acceptance No change in religious acceptance
Criminalization Criminalization Decrease in criminalization
Scapegoating Scapegoating No scapegoating
Step 5: Scenarios
The scenarios are intended to provide insight into the future Each scenario is written in a narrative format from the perspective
of LGBTI social exclusion. Each represents a possible future. of 2030. The scenarios depict the context in a given country,
They should not be taken as definitive predictions, rather as rather than trying to depict global trends that would inevitably
archetypes to help illustrate how the issue could evolve in the overlook local variations.
coming years.
32
References
1. UN Department of Social and Economic Affairs. 206. Report 12. Balzer, C., 2018. Transgender Europe (TGEU). https://
on the World Social Situation 2016: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/ transrespect.org/en/map/trans-murder-monitoring/
rwss/2016/chapter1.pdf
13. Spiegelhalter, D., 2014. Is 10% of the population really gay?
2 Protracted crises are where “a significant proportion of the The Guardian. April 5, 2014. https://www.theguardian.com/
population is vulnerable to death, disease or disruption of their society/2015/apr/05/10-per-cent-population-gay-alfred-kinsey-
livelihoods over a long period of time.” See: Bennett, C., 2015. statistics
The Development Agency of the Future, Overseas Development
Institute. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/ 14. Gates, G.J., 2011. How Many People are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual
publications-opinion-files/9612.pdf and Transgender? The Williams Institute. https://escholarship.
org/uc/item/09h684x2
3. Stuart, E., and Samman, E., 2017 Defining Leave No One
Behind. Overseas Development Institute; Dorey, K., 2016. The 15. Coffman, K.B., Coffman, L.C. and Ericson, K.M.M., 2016. The size
Sustainable Development Goals and LGBT Inclusion. Stonewall of the LGBT population and the magnitude of antigay sentiment
International. are substantially underestimated. Management Science, 63(10),
pp.3168-3186. http://www.nber.org/papers/w19508.pdf
4. Based on the Genderbread Person v3.3 see: http://
itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2015/03/the-genderbread- 16. Chalabi, M. 2014. Why We Don’t Know The Size Of The
person-v3/ Transgender Population? FiveThirtyEight. July 29, 2014. https://
fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-we-dont-know-the-size-of-the-
transgender-population/
5. Levitas, R., Pantazis, C., Fahmy, E., Gordon, D., Lloyd, E. and
Patsios, D., 2007. The Multi-dimensional Analysis of Social
17. Jones, R.P. and Cox, D., 2015. How race and religion shape
Exclusion. http://roar.uel.ac.uk/1781/1/multidimensional.pdf
millennial attitudes on sexuality and reproductive health. Public
Religion Research Institute. https://www.prri.org/wp-content/
6. UN Department of Social and Economic Affairs. 206. Report
uploads/2015/03/PRRI-Millennials-Web-FINAL.pdf
on the World Social Situation 2016: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/
rwss/2016/chapter1.pdf
18. Lieb, S., Thompson, D.R., Misra, S., Gates, G.J., Duffus,
W.A., Fallon, S.J., Liberti, T.M., Foust, E.M., Malow, R.M. and
7. Haas, A.P., Rodgers, P.L., and Herman, J.L., 2014. Suicide
Southern AIDS Coalition MSM Project Team, 2009. Estimating
Attempts among Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming
populations of men who have sex with men in the southern
Adults Findings of The National Transgender Discrimination
United States. Journal of Urban Health, 86(6), pp.887-901.
Survey. The Williams Institute, UCLA. https://williamsinstitute.law. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/
ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-
Final.pdf MSMSouthernUSStudy-Nov-2009.pdf
8. Lee Badgett, M.V., Durso, L.E., and Schneebaum, A., 2013. New 19. Gates, G.J., 2011. How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual
Patterns of Poverty in the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Community. and transgender? The Williams Institute. https://escholarship.
The Williams Institute, UCLA. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla. org/uc/item/09h684x2
edu/wp-content/uploads/LGB-Poverty-Update-Jun-2013.pdf
20. Coffman, K.B., Coffman, L.C. and Ericson, K.M.M., 2016. The size
9. Ibid. of the LGBT population and the magnitude of antigay sentiment
are substantially underestimated. Management Science, 63(10),
10. Ryan, C., Russell, S.T., Huebner, D., Diaz, R. and Sanchez, J., pp.3168-3186. http://www.nber.org/papers/w19508.pdf
2010. Family acceptance in adolescence and the health of LGBTI
young adults. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric 21. UNAIDS. Men who have sex with men: Population size
Nursing, 23(4), pp.205-213. https://pdfs.semanticscholar. estimate. http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=UNAIDS&f=inID%3A112
org/0c4d/4b9e43ecf76e5f2e4166318bab11f8aef2ab.pdf
22. World Health Organization, 2009. Prevention and
11. Park, H and Mykhyalyshyn, I., 2016. L.G.B.T. People Are More treatment of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections
Likely to Be Targets of Hate Crimes Than Any Other Minority among men who have sex with men and transgender
Group. The New York Times, June 16, 2016. https://www.nytimes. populations: report of a technical consultation, 15-
com/interactive/2016/06/16/us/hate-crimes-against-lgbt.html 17 September 2008, Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.
who.int/hiv/pub/populations/msm_mreport_2008.pdf
33
23. International HIV/AIDS Alliance. 2003. Between men: HIV/STI 33. Fisher, M., 2013. From colonialism to ‘kill the gays’: The
prevention among men who have sex with men. http://www.who. surprisingly recent roots of homophobia in Africa. The
Washington Post. June 27, 2013. https://www.washingtonpost.
int/hiv/topics/vct/sw_toolkit/Between_men_full_version.pdf com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/06/27/from-colonialism-to-
kill-the-gays-the-surprisingly-recent-roots-of-homophobia-in-
24. Human Rights Commission of San Francisco (San Francisco, africa/?utm_term=.4dcce79f29be
Calif.). LGBTI Advisory Committee and Ulrich, L., 2012. Bisexual
invisibility: Impacts and recommendations. San Francisco Human 34. Warner, G., 2016. When the U.S. Backs Gay and Lesbian Rights
Rights Commission, LGBTI Advisory Committee. http://sf-hrc. In Africa, Is There a Backlash? Goats and Soda, NPR. https://
org//sites/default/files/Documents/HRC_Publications/Articles/ www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2016/08/30/491818892/
Bisexual_Invisiblity_Impacts_and_Recommendations_March_2011. when-the-u-s-backs-gay-and-lesbian-rights-in-africa-is-there-a-
pdf backlash%20
25. Steinmetz, K., 2017. Behind the TIME Cover Story: Beyond 35. Kaoma, K., 2014. American culture warriors in Africa: A guide
‘He’ or ‘She’. TIME Magazine. March 16, 2017. to the exporters of homophobia and sexism. Political Research
http://time.com/4703058/time-cover-story-beyond-he-or-she/ Associates. https://www.politicalresearch.org/issues/africa/book-
american-culture-warriors-in-africa/
26. Ainsworth, C., 2015. Sex redefined. Nature, 518(7539), p.288.
https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943 36. Pettigrew, T.F. and Tropp, L.R., 2006. A meta-analytic test
of intergroup contact theory. Journal of personality and social
27. Blackless, M., Charuvastra, A., Derryck, A., Fausto-Sterling, psychology, 90(5), p.751. http://www.iaccp.org/sites/default/files/
A., Lauzanne, K. and Lee, E., 2000. How sexually dimorphic are pettigrew_tropp_2006_contact_theory_0.pdf
we? Review and synthesis. American Journal of Human Biology,
12(2), pp.151-166. http://www.aissg.org/PDFs/Blackless-How- 37. Godsil, R.D., Tropp, L.R., Goff, P.A. and Powell, J.A., 2014.
Dimorphic-2000.pdf Addressing implicit bias, racial anxiety, and stereotype threat
in education and health care. The Science of Equality, 1.
28. For an interesting visualization of this dynamic see: Montanez, https://equity.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Science-of-
A., 2017. Visualizing Sex as a Spectrum. Scientific American, SA Equality-Vol.-1-Perception-Institute-2014.pdf
Visual. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/sa-visual/visualizing-
sex-as-a-spectrum/ 38. Broockman, D. and Kalla, J., 2016. Durably reducing
transphobia: A field experiment on door-to-door canvassing.
29. The United Nations Free and Equal Initiative has compiled Science, 352(6282), pp.220-224. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
a global, time-series map of the criminalization of same-sex pubmed/27124458
relations by country from 1790-2015. It shows how many of the
French colonies where the first to decriminalize the practice, 39. Pescosolido, B.A. and Martin, J.K., 2015. The stigma complex.
while in the British ones they often persist through to the Annual Review of sociology, 41, pp.87-116. http://europepmc.org/
present. https://www.unfe.org/learn-more/ articles/pmc4737963
30. Han, E. and O’Mahoney, J., 2014. British colonialism and 40. Link, B.G. and Phelan, J.C., 2001. Conceptualizing stigma.
the criminalization of homosexuality. Cambridge Review of Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), pp.363-385. http://www.
International Affairs, 27(2), pp.268-288. https://www.tandfonline. montefiore.org/documents/Original-Article-Conceptulalizing-
com/doi/abs/10.1080/09557571.2013.867298 Stigma.pdf
31. Human Rights Watch (HRW). 2008. Alien Legacy: Origins 41. Baral, S.C., Karki, D.K. and Newell, J.N., 2007. Causes of stigma and
of sodomy laws in British colonialism. https://www.hrw.org/ discrimination associated with tuberculosis in Nepal: a qualitative
report/2008/12/17/alien-legacy/origins-sodomy-laws-british- study. BMC Public Health, 7(1), p.211. https://bmcpublichealth.
colonialism biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-7-211
32. Han, E. and O’Mahoney, J., 2014. British colonialism and 42. Major, B. and O’brien, L.T., 2005. The social psychology of
the criminalization of homosexuality. Cambridge Review of stigma. Annual Reiew Psychology 56, pp.393-421. http://courses.
International Affairs, 27(2), pp.268-288. https://www.tandfonline. washington.edu/pbafhall/514/514%20Readings/majorandobrien.
com/doi/abs/10.1080/09557571.2013.867298 pdf
34
43. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2016. Gay and 55. HRW. 2017. Equality to brutality: global trends in LGBTI rights.
Bisexual Men’s Health: Stigma and Discrimination. https://www. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/07/equality-brutality-global-
trends-lgbt-rights
cdc.gov/msmhealth/stigma-and-discrimination.htm
56. UNHRC. 2015. Discrimination and violence against
44. Pescosolido, B.A. and Martin, J.K., 2015. The stigma complex. individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity.
http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/
Annual Review of Sociology, 41, pp.87-116. http://europepmc.org/ HRC/29/23&referer=/english/&Lang=E
articles/pmc4737963
57. United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
45. International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex (OHCHR) 2011. Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of
Association (ILGA). 2017. State Sponsored Homophobia 2017: violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and
gender identity. Report No.: UN Doc A/HRC/19/41. http://www.
A world survey of sexual orientation laws: criminalisation, ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/
protection and recognition. https://ilga.org/downloads/2017/ Session19/A-HRC-19-41_en.pdf
ILGA_State_Sponsored_Homophobia_2017_WEB.pdf
58. ILGA. 2017. State Sponsored Homophobia 2017: A world
survey of sexual orientation laws: criminalisation, protection
46. Pew Research Center. 2013. The Global Divide on and recognition. https://ilga.org/downloads/2017/ILGA_State_
Homosexuality. http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the- Sponsored_Homophobia_2017_WEB.pdf
global-divide-on-homosexuality/
59. For a map of laws against same-sex practice over time see:
https://www.unfe.org/learn-more/
47. Pew based their religiosity index on individuals’ beliefs that
faith in god is necessary for morality, how important religion is 60. ILGA. 2017. State-sponsored homophobia. https://ilga.org/
in their lives, and if they pray once a day. downloads/2017/ILGA_State_Sponsored_Homophobia_2017_
WEB.pdf
48. Pew Research Center. 2013. The Global Divide on 61. OHCHR. 2015. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human
Homosexuality. http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the- rights defenders. A/70/217, p. 9, §36. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/
global-divide-on-homosexuality/ Issues/SRHRDefenders/Pages/SRHRDefendersIndex.aspx
49. Whitley Jr, B.E., 2009. Religiosity and attitudes toward 62. OHCHR 2011. Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of
lesbians and gay men: A meta-analysis. International Journal for violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation
the Psychology of Religion, 19(1), pp.21-38. http://psycnet.apa. and gender identity. A/HRC/19/41, p. 18, §62. http://www.ohchr.
org/record/2009-00948-002 org/Documents/Issues/Discrimination/A.HRC.19.41_English.pdf
50. Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). 63. ILGA. 2017. State-sponsored homophobia. https://ilga.org/
2017. 2017 Studio Responsibility Index. http://www.glaad.org/ downloads/2017/ILGA_State_Sponsored_Homophobia_2017_
files/2017_SRI.pdf WEB.pdf
51. GLAAD. 2016. GLADD Media Reference Guide. http://www. 64. Ibid.
glaad.org/sites/default/files/GLAAD-Media-Reference-Guide-
Tenth-Edition.pdf 65. Ibid.
52. Warner, G., 2016. When the U.S. Backs Gay and Lesbian Rights 66. HRW. 2016. Uganda: Anti-Homosexuality Act’s Heavy
In Africa, Is There a Backlash? Goats and Soda, NPR. https:// Toll. https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/05/14/uganda-anti-
www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2016/08/30/491818892/ homosexuality-acts-heavy-toll
when-the-u-s-backs-gay-and-lesbian-rights-in-africa-is-there-
a-backlash 67. BBC. 2013. India top court reinstates gay sex ban. http://www.
bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25329065
53. Weiss, M.L. and Bosia, M.J. eds., 2013. Global homophobia:
States, movements, and the politics of oppression. University of 68. HRW 2016. Nigeria: Harsh Law’s Severe Impact on LGBTI
Illinois Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/j.ctt3fh5hk and Community. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/10/20/nigeria-
HRW. 2017. Equality to brutality: global trends in LGBTI rights. harsh-laws-severe-impact-lgbt-community
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/07/equality-brutality-global-
trends-lgbt-rights
54. UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). 2015. Discrimination

and violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation
and gender identity. http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.
asp?symbol=A/HRC/29/23&referer=/english/&Lang=E
35
69. HRW. 2016. Indonesia: Court Reviews Anti-LGBTI Law.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/08/23/indonesia-court-reviews-
anti-lgbt-law
70. HRW. 2017. Russian Activist in Court on ‘Gay Propaganda’

Charge. https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/09/19/russian-activist-
court-gay-propaganda-charge
71. Human Rights Campaign. 2017. 100 Anti-LGBTIQ Bills

Introduced in 2017. https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/09/19/
russian-activist-court-gay-propaganda-charge
72. Based on estimates of LGBTI populations discussed above.
73. IARAN. 2017. The Future of Aid: INGOs in 2030. http://www.

iaran.org/future-of-aid/
74. Protracted crises are where “a significant proportion of the

population is vulnerable to death, disease or disruption of their
livelihoods over a long period of time.” See: Bennett, C., 2015.
The Development Agency of the Future. Overseas Development
Institute. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/
publications-opinion-files/9612.pdf
36
For more information or to get in touch,
Visit: www.iaran.org
Email: info@iaran.org
Find us on Twitter: @InteragencyRAN
37

LGBTreport FINAL - Compressed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LGBTreport FINAL - Compressed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LGBTreport FINAL - Compressed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Global Outlook on LGBTI

Social Exclusion through 2030

Heavy trends in LGBTI social exclusion 11

• Laura Carter, Amnesty International UK

• Yves Yomb, Africagay contre le sida

• Dr Anne Senequier, IRIS

• Doug Kerr, Dignity Network

• Maurice Tomlinson, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

• Carlos Idibouo, House of Culture for Human Diversity,

• Dr Michel Bourrelly, IHU Méditerranée Infection

• Sergey Neamoscou, photographer

Image by Sergey Neamoscou

• The use of foresight approaches, like scenario analysis, can

Image by Sergey Neamoscou

Image by Sergey Neamoscou

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Drivers Step 4 Step 5

Level of interaction and

Negative representation in Scenarios

High influence on system Criminalization Scenario hypotheses

Factors driving social Political scapegoating

Marriage and parental

Low influence (but not low Perception of cause/

Biological sex Transgender

Gender identity Cisgender

Gender expression Sexual orientation

Social exclusion is a multi-dimensional process6 that impacts

Image by Sergey Neamoscou

•• Religious acceptance One of the major challenges to the conception of sexuality

Image by Sergey Neamoscou

Figure 3. Laws against same-sex practice by maximum sentence. 63

Death penalty 645,000 36,100,000

15 years to life imprisonment 3,859,000 216,120,000

8 to 14 years years imprisonment 1,227,000 68,720,000

3 to 7 years imprisonment 828,000 46,360,000

1 month to 2 years imprisonment 560,000 31,390,000

Total 7,119,000 398,680,000

Table 2. Summary table of the scenario logics.

Slow going Progress and persecution Hollow victories Institutions as leaders

Familiarity Greater familiarity leads to decreased social exclusion

Social stigma remains

No change in religious No change in religious

Criminalization Criminalization remains Criminalization remains Decrease in criminalization Decrease in criminalization

Scapegoating No scapegoating Scapegoating No scapegoating No scapegoating

Threats to progress on LGBTI social inclusion:

• The government and other social institutions are not

•• Space for humanitarian actors to program directly for LGBTI

•• International actors could be perceived as outsiders

Image by Sergey Neamoscou

• Depending on the political party in power, the climate could

• The continued hostile political and legal environment

• More positive media representations.

• Decrease in criminal prohibitions against same-sex

Image by Sergey Neamoscou

• Decrease in criminal prohibitions against same-sex

This report also included seven additional factors that were

15 drivers of LGBTI social exclusion

Impact- Uncertainty Matrix

3 heavy trends 12 critical uncertainties